163 réponses à ce sujet

[PWENER]

Xilizhra wrote...

Some peoples' mileage may vary.

???  ???

[Xilizhra]

Not everyone will find inevitable death fun.

[Zulmoka531]

PWENER wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

That's why you should be forced to let a squadmate die.

Well... it is a game, the primary purpose of which is to have fun.

Actually, in ME3, squadmates will die without you effecting anything. The devs already said so. All variables will be exploited and let loose. People will die and things will happen depending on the choices of the two previous games.

That's the first time I've heard of a Dev stating a squadmate will die.

[Whatever42]

Shandepared wrote...

rememberence wrote...

I have to disagree. I don't want mandatory collateral damage of squadmates. Blowing up Earth, taking out some capitals I'm fine with but I don't want to be forced to have to let a squad mate die.

That's why you should be forced to let a squadmate die.

Some people are more comfortable with different levels of dramatic tension. Some people want Star Trek IV, some want Star Trek II.

As was already pointed out very well, in ME2, the average non-spoiler first play-through almost certainly had teammates die. There was certainly dramatic tension.  However, if someone really dislikes that degree of tension, they could read the spoilers or replay some missions and avoid it. Both players get what they want.

Now on replays, once you know how to avoid anyone dying, I agree its a lot less tense. But then again, when I play ME1, I just emotionally write off Kaiden as a walking dead man so there is no tension there either.

There is no reason to force dark endings on people, there is more than enough dramatic tension in this series as it is. The suggestion of a few people, to randomly kill teammates or force deaths will simply ruin the game for many players for no real purpose.

[Whatever42]

PWENER wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

That's why you should be forced to let a squadmate die.

Well... it is a game, the primary purpose of which is to have fun.

Actually, in ME3, squadmates will die without you effecting anything. The devs already said so. All variables will be exploited and let loose. People will die and things will happen depending on the choices of the two previous games.

And that's the perfect way of doing it. However, if they said it as you stated, that still doesn't mean the deaths are unavoidable. It just means that you might have to replay the whole story. Do you remember where you read/heard this, though?

[PWENER]

Zulmoka531 wrote...

PWENER wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

That's why you should be forced to let a squadmate die.

Well... it is a game, the primary purpose of which is to have fun.

Actually, in ME3, squadmates will die without you effecting anything. The devs already said so. All variables will be exploited and let loose. People will die and things will happen depending on the choices of the two previous games.

That's the first time I've heard of a Dev stating a squadmate will die.

They said, PEOPLE would die, I just assume it will be squadmates. Who else would there be? NPCs? NPCs die all the time in ME.

[PWENER]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

PWENER wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

That's why you should be forced to let a squadmate die.

Well... it is a game, the primary purpose of which is to have fun.

Actually, in ME3, squadmates will die without you effecting anything. The devs already said so. All variables will be exploited and let loose. People will die and things will happen depending on the choices of the two previous games.

And that's the perfect way of doing it. However, if they said it as you stated, that still doesn't mean the deaths are unavoidable. It just means that you might have to replay the whole story. Do you remember where you read/heard this, though?

Some video interview with Casey Hudson. Don't ask wich one, I've seen so many and it was months ago. Sorry.

[PWENER]

Shandepared wrote...

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

Some people want Star Trek IV, some want Star Trek II.

Anyone who wants Star Trek IV over Star Trek II has lousy taste.

ANYONE, who wants anything related with star trek has bad taste. That series sucks.

Countdown until being flamed by noobs...   3...... 2..... 1....... 0.5........

[Rockworm503]

Shandepared wrote...

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

Some people want Star Trek IV, some want Star Trek II.

Anyone who wants Star Trek IV over Star Trek II has lousy taste.

Why don't you just say what you want to say?
I want it my way and everyone else can go f off... thats what I get from your posts.
You are so disrespectful in nearly all of your posts I'm surprised no one else is getting mad at you.
"anyone who disagrees with me are idiots and have sucky tastes and you're playing the game wrong if you don't play it the way I do"
thats all I'm seeing.

[Rockworm503]

Shandepared wrote...

PWENER wrote...


ANYONE, who wants anything related with star trek has bad taste. That series sucks.

Star Trek II is good. Or so they say. I've never seen it. Or any Star Trek movie (except for First Contact)

I'm gonna stand by my previous statement though.

you've never seen it your statement is void.
No one who hasn't seen something doesn't get to have an opinion on it otherwise their forming one out of ignorance.

[Zulmoka531]

PWENER wrote...

Zulmoka531 wrote...

PWENER wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

That's why you should be forced to let a squadmate die.

Well... it is a game, the primary purpose of which is to have fun.

Actually, in ME3, squadmates will die without you effecting anything. The devs already said so. All variables will be exploited and let loose. People will die and things will happen depending on the choices of the two previous games.

That's the first time I've heard of a Dev stating a squadmate will die.

They said, PEOPLE would die, I just assume it will be squadmates. Who else would there be? NPCs? NPCs die all the time in ME.

They also said Shepard would die in ME2..he did..at the begining and if you were realitvely silly, he could at the end aswell. I take what I hear about unreleased games witha  grain of salt. This is Bioware, even with the ME series, they are very careful with how they handle characters, or at least they always have been.

And people dying can mean many things. NPCs are just as vital as squadmates. Anderson for example, is a NPC. Aria, the Illusive man, so on and so forth.

Modifié par Zulmoka531, 19 septembre 2010 - 04:28 .

[Pacifien]

Take yer personal squabbles to private chat lest I keelhaul ya under me boat for getting the thread off track, mateys. Also, avoid quote pyramids.

[JockBuster]

Xilizhra wrote...

I didn't have much emotional attachment to either Ashley or Kaidan; I just save whomever is at the AA tower so I can pick up the salarian team too. Now, if it had been a choice between Garrus and Tali... that would have carried impact (one of them with Liara would have had an impact as well, but it'd be a non-choice in reality).

Legion's arc, though, is definitely not complete, and nor is Tali's. Not when you consider the looming quarian/geth issue. In fact, the only people I can see dying in the base as part of their arc are Miranda, Jack, Samara and Thane.

As to Virmire, you CAN save the one at the bomb AND Karriihe too (don't ask, "artistic license"). I always send Ashley to the AA tower then go back can save Kaidan, THE most emotional part of the whole game (would work if you saved Ashley too)! 
Experiment!
The game is about choices, good, not so good and really bad. What choices you (I) made in ME1 & ME2 WILL have dire consequences in ME3, PERIOD, 'cuz CH said so! I have a number of different games just to see how BW makes things happen in ME2 then ME3. And if I don't like the outcome in ME3, oh well, I guess I get to start all over from square one with new ME1 play thru, etc. I have MaleSheps & FemSheps, LIs (Kaidan & Liara) and no LI, all loyal in ME2. But, I have done FemShep/Jacob (drek, YUK! deleted that game), MaleShep/Jack (wham, bam thank you m'am) and MaleShep/Tali (NICE); no Kelly (the fish always die) or Miranda.

Modifié par JockBuster, 19 septembre 2010 - 05:34 .

[GenericPlayer2]

Not everyone is going to import a no-casualty ME2 game into ME3. I for one will be looking forward to a Jack-free ME3 experience.

I hope ME3 does bring some really tough decisions, and avoids the 'have your cake and eat it too" style of outcomes that some of the ME2 loyalty missions have.

Modifié par GenericPlayer2, 19 septembre 2010 - 05:39 .

[Moiaussi]

PWENER wrote...

They said, PEOPLE would die, I just assume it will be squadmates. Who else would there be? NPCs? NPCs die all the time in ME.

Squadmates are PC's? Which squadmates aren't NPC's? Lol....

[Moiaussi]

JockBuster wrote...

As to Virmire, you CAN save the one at the bomb AND Karriihe too (don't ask, "artistic license"). I always send Ashley to the AA tower then go back can save Kaidan, THE most emotional part of the whole game (would work if you saved Ashley too)! 
Experiment!
The game is about choices, good, not so good and really bad. What choices you (I) made in ME1 & ME2 WILL have dire consequences in ME3, PERIOD, 'cuz CH said so! I have a number of different games just to see how BW makes things happen in ME2 then ME3. And if I don't like the outcome in ME3, oh well, I guess I get to start all over from square one with new ME1 play thru, etc. I have MaleSheps & FemSheps, LIs (Kaidan & Liara) and no LI, all loyal in ME2. But, I have done FemShep/Jacob (drek, YUK! deleted that game), MaleShep/Jack (wham, bam thank you m'am) and MaleShep/Tali (NICE); no Kelly (the fish always die) or Miranda.

Not sure if it is just something about the writing or if it is just sad commentary about our society, but so many seem to have a greater commitment to a crew that Shepard spends what, a year or so with (and that we only spend a few hours with) than to the rest of civilization. "Dire consequences" could easily refer to what kind of history develops after the final battle in ME3. We could keep the entire crew alive but still have made the wrong decision about the Geth and be overrun by them (or even by the Quarians... that one could go either way), or the Rachnii, or something else the Rachnii or Geth or Quarians weren't available to help stop, or we could have backed the wrong horse in one or more of our investments via the shadow broker center leading to worse endings.... Thorian sprouts could spring up all over the place (via the Feros survivers) and start a new war (or even be a new ally, who knows?).

So many variables....

[Zan51]

People need a personal stake in their future, thus the team and crew mean a lot. Plus they watch each other's backs and keep each other alive in what is intense fighting at times. This is what the military is about, a brotherhood/sisterhood of warriors.



As for civilization as a whole, it is just too vast a concept for some folk to grasp. We need to handle things in manageable chunks. So the team and crew are understandable.

[Zan Mura]

Major Truth wrote...

Shandepared wrote...

Frankly, I think the suicide mission should have had some mandatory collateral damage.

Yes I agree. Do you think that it should have been random or do you think squadmates should have been sacrificed based on your decisions?

No point in making it random. People would just feel cheated and bullied, and be forced to spam load games until the teammates they wanted to survive, did. But choices with consequences isn't a bad thing, as long as they avoid the "gotcha!" moments that were referred to during the development of DAO. For example, having now dedicated two full games to the Liara romance, having her OR Shepard die in ME3 with no way to avoid it, to me equals cheating the entire experience since game one. In fact, were that the case, then I would rather never have played any Mass Effect in the first place. Because that's as gotcha as it gets.

BioWare, as story- and character focused as they are, understand full well the emotional investments people have in their games. And effectively crushing someone's greatest hopes and desires just to deliver drama isn't an effective solution. So it's really about striking somewhere that feels, but doesn't hurt or damage. Taking out a teammate of your own choice while enabling Shepard to explain it off as a reasonable solution as opposed to an emotional one, is a great solution in that it gives the player the control to choose the less harmful option, yet still perfectly realise the impact of the situation... all the while avoiding the guilt of leading a commander like an emotional being who obviously wasn't fit for command. That was a confusing sentence.

At any rate, I do hope that ME3 is dark. But I also damn well hope they don't go overboard. I don't believe they will, as they've done excellent job so far. But let's just say that I never want to repeat any FF VII Aeris incidents again. Ever.

[GodWood]

I can't believe people actually want their Shepard's to have painless fairytale endings.

I'll never understand the human psyche...

[Nimander]

The issue is not everyone thinks that drama is mandated by character deaths, and are not trying to change what Mass Effect is predicated upon.

Death is not necessary to make something dramatic.  There's a variety of stories that have sufficient drama without main character/protagonist-linked death.  And heck, there are other bad consequences other than death.  What if re-integrating the geth cause complications and cause the Geth to go haywire?  As Shephard says, that sort of thing could have ramifications for a human.

A lot of these reads to me like people believe tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TrueArtIsAngsty

This is not realistic science fiction.  It has a veneer of that, but it has, from the beginning, been stated to be a reconstruction of classical pulp science fiction.  Not down to earth, uber-realistic science fiction.  If you want it to be the latter?  This is -not- the game for you.  Please don't try to make it that.

I think there's room for both, basically.  If you want folks to die, there's ways to do it.  If folks want to cleave towards the more classical pulp roots?  They can do that too.